3 ms·
Looks like he got tripped up by the fine difference between arete and virtue. In Aristotelian philosophy, virtue is something you are born with but arete is som
by vinnyvichy 2y ago
Looks like he got tripped up by the fine difference between arete and virtue. In Aristotelian philosophy, virtue is something you are born with but arete is something that is taught. (Accordingly, most peasants are born with virtue, although it might be hard for them to access arete). When put like that, it doesn't sound too off-putting, does it?
- skulk 2y agoSo you're saying everyone (or almost everyone) has the potential to be great, we just need to give them the opportunity. Maybe if we go a little farther and say no one, at birth, inherently deserves more opportun.. oops, we're back at egalitarianism.
- vinnyvichy 2y agoIt's hard to argue against equal opportunity egalitarianism, no? The real hard debate is rather over how to measure outcomes? (Consider free tuition, keeping pple in college/high school until they pass, assigning profs randomly to different schools etc.)
- skulk 2y agoThe whole lecture is a screed against egalitarianiam.
- vinnyvichy 2y agoSorry, did not mean to assign (much) merit to the lecture, although it might be worthwhile to read its transcript in order study how exponents of Nietzsche might get tripped up (in subtle ways[0], as well in more obvious ways, e.g., by their own enthusiasm) [0]he calls some people "sick", which means a cure is at least imaginable, yes? EDIT: in "Beyond Good & Evil", the occurrences of the combination "Slave morality" are much more numerous than "Slave" on its own. Not so in this guy's lecture. https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sklavenmoral https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sklavenmoral